The Abrahamic covenant

[Vic]

(06-25-2012 09:28 AM)corecrash Wrote:  

(05-20-2011 10:40 AM)Rose of Shushan Wrote:  

Quote:Thank you. I have other versions and I am aware of translations. I agree with the translations you posted. But don't you see that it shows that when Ad-nai is accepted and and the Ruach HaKodesh is in a believers life, He (the Father) gives us wisdom and the scriptures open up? I

It adds words in the verse that aren't there, though.The words "says the Torah" just arent there.If that doesn't bother you then its fine but it would bother me and I am pointing it out for those who think that the CJB is an accurate translation.

I'm new here, but I've been reading and am fascinated with all that I've read so far.

I'm not really one of those people that adheres to certain translations saying one is better than the other but I wanted to inject my 2 cents worth here.

There are lots of translations that paraphrase and I've heard throughout the years since I became a christian that one group is going to hell for reading the NIV or the other group is this or that.

There are words that are inserted in the KJV and all the others. Heck, look at the The Message translation. It has lots of insertions.

But, I look at it this way. Is the overall meaning changed? I think daughterofmosthigh has the meaning correct, regardless if she had to get that from multiple translations or just one.

God told us not to change the Word of God but I don't think we are to be like the Pharisee's and take it the nth degree as to say we cannot make a single change as that would invalidate any and all english translations, latin, etc. Think of it this way. I've read in these forums that some folks in certain movements think the translators from Greek to English made mistakes but they shouldn't' be worried because those men were smart and knew what they were doing. I agree with that statement, but likewise, it can be said of all translators. Most of them have good intentions and know what they are doing.

Now if the root meaning is changed, then I think we have a problem.

Hi corecrash,

First, welcome to the forum. Please take the time to introduce yourself here > Introduce Yourself! ALL NEWBIES * Please Do MAKE THIS YOUR FIRST POST! DID YOU READ THE FORUM RULES? http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=17

Second, please do make sure you have read the forum rules in their entirety. http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=2

Third, you are doing a lot of posting, which I appreciate, but would ask you to slow down a bit and perhaps take a little more time reading as you posting thoughts into threads that are actually found in other related threads to your various posts. Thank you.

I think your suppositions about translations are missing various facts to back up your statements. As Rose was pointing out, the words being used were not in the originals and it fully >changed< the intended meaning. THere is a difference when translating into another language to make a sentence make sense from one language to the next. There is a difference if one omits or changes the original information in that translation and hence changes the message conveyed, the root is changed and that can be shown many times, as was the point Rose was making.

There is a section about Bible versions if you wish to go indepth about that topic. Suffice it to say in this thread that there is a difference in a paraphrase, version or translation, and so on.

It would be inaccurate to suggest that all translators have good intentions and/or know what they are doing. Many have agendas contrary to Christ. And there are different source documents being used for various translations which means they can be and are different, and convey a very different message many times.